Ms Rachel Meade V Westminster CC & Social Work England Employment Tribunal Hearing

[ickky]

The hearing starts on 1st December 10am at London Central.

If you want to observe please send your email request to

[email protected]

The email header should read

PUBLIC ACCESS REQUEST Case NO: 2200179/2022 Date 01/12/2022 London Central Ms R Meade - Westminster CC & Social Work England

I just asked for the link and pin and I also included my name & address, but I'm not sure if that is necessary.

I believe as ever that veg still needs sowing.

👏👏Couldn't put it better, well said

EJ - how much time did you spend on this matter?
LK - I wasn't the investigator
EJ - how much time
supervising? Minutes, hours, days.
LK - maybe 2 hours

2 hours!!!!!

She's being cagey. She knows the truth will make her look bad. Something, her conscience?, is stopping her from outright lying though. As 2 hours is woeful I wonder what the truth actually is. Did she just dismiss it to a lackey, so minutes, or was she more involved?

From what she says in evidence it looks more like minutes. She's not given it the slightest thought just responded to emails to get them off her to do list probably.

The fact that EJ started at minutes would indicate that they think it's had very little input from her.

Not a SW, but all excellent points, exwhyzed!

Who decides what is right think and wrong think when it comes to disrepute?

Good point.

I find myself seeing a comparison between Rachel's initial reaction to the complaint and that of other instances of false confession. People do admit to stuff they're not guilty of for a multitude of reason, I hope the court can see this.

Yes definitely. Also the timing is relevant. She would have got a letter pre Maya’s win telling her she was being discriminatory. Loads of people were questioning their own beliefs at that time worried that they were behind the times or like racists or like homophobes 30 years ago. Nobody really knew what they were aloud to say out loud any more. I can imagine how tempting it would be to take a rap on the knuckles and do a mermaids course and pretend you think people can change sex rather than face a whole regulatory hearing which is what she would have potentially faced if she’d dug her heals in (and the punishment is definitely in the process). In the post Maya world we can all be so much more confident about saying what we think. Maya changed everything.

And since she won I think every GC case has been found in favour of reality.

if I was a professional regulator I’d be a bit worried bout what cases I had put on my books. 100k, that’s a lot of money

i hope Maya has booked herself an outrageously swanky holiday.

Think I missed this, as it started a day later does this mean it will also finish a day later than originally scheduled?

I don’t think it started a day late, the first day might have been for reading?

It says on RM's crowdfund page that it was delayed by a day due to "lack of judicial resources". It is unlikely that it will finish a day later than originally scheduled though. These things are usually booked months ahead and it is unlikely that all the parties would be available at such short notice.

Thank you both, hoping they still have time to hear her case and evidence to the full. I know it’s still early days but I really can’t tell which way it will go.

According to Tribunal Tweets, on the first day there was the following exchange:

SC [Simon Cheetham, barrister for Social Work England and Westminster City Council] - I was instructed very late and I have a professional engagement on Tuesday,
EJ [Employment judge Nicolle]: - we will rise at 12:15 that day. I am not available to sit on Thursday until 1 pm.
NC [Naomi Cunningham, barrister for Rachel] - the timetable is tight, is there any possibility to extend hours, sit earlier etc.
EJ: - we will see.

I'm not sure if anything further was agreed.

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20230706162033/threadreaderapp.com/thread/1676935570583351300.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://web.archive.org/web/20230706162033/threadreaderapp.com/thread/1676935570583351300.html

This morning's TT thread

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1678319416486907904.html

Thank you, @ickky

Thank you. That witness seemed quite defensive. Chippy. I just wonder if NC needs to take it a bit slower.

I'm wondering if that person was purposefully being quiet so that his answers couldn't be tweeted!

And I'm getting the distinct impression that their investigation was piss poor. Probably because they'd already made their minds up as soon as the conplaint arrived.

Was there some thing in there about the person complaining and the person doing the investigating knowing each other? Or am i just getting confused!

Thank you for alerting me to this case, I was not aware of it. I am a social worker. I have made a donation to Rachel's legal costs.

The witness citing the public sector equality duty is a bit fucking rich. All of our captured public bodies forget it pretty quickly when they're busy trampling those with PCs of sex, relion or belief and disability in order to give primacy to gender

Fuck me. Social Work England coming across as thinking that safeguarding concerns are irrelevant because they're not expressed in the right words?

Precisely. The Gender Woo Hegemony is more important than safeguarding. This is the fucking social work regulator.

(Excuse swearing.)

My impression is that the SWE witness is not coming out of this looking good. And the investigation undertaken was decidedly sketchy?

Yup. He's looking really ropey. Had to admit to the judge (who asked) that they hadn't had training in Forstater re the protected characteristic of belief.

He's clutching at straws left, right and centre.

Thank you @ickky

At the start were they talking about and comparing to a similar case?